Special Issue on the Semantic Web for the Legal Domain Guest Editors’ Editorial: the Next Step

Home , Semantic publishing, Semantic Web (journal), Web science

Special Issue on the Semantic Web for the Legal Domain Guest Editors’ Editorial: The Next Step

Pompeu Casanovasa,b, Monica Palmiranic, Silvio Peronid,*, Tom van Engerse, Fabio Vitalif a [email protected] Institute of Law and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Campus de la UAB, 08193 Bellaterra (Barcelona), Spain b [email protected] Law and Policy Program: Data to Decisions Cooperative Research Centre, Law School, Deakin University 1 Gheringhap Street, Geelong VIC 3220, Australia c [email protected] CIRSFID, University of Bologna, via Galliera, 3, 40121 Bologna (BO), Italy d [email protected] Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Bologna, Mura Anteo Zamboni 7, 40126 Bologna (BO), Italy e [email protected] Leibniz Center for Law, University of Amsterdam, Vendelstraat 8, 1012 XX Amsterdam, The Netherlands f [email protected] Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Bologna, Mura Anteo Zamboni 7, 40126 Bologna (BO), Italy

Abstract. Ontology-driven systems with reasoning capabilities in the legal field are now better understood. Legal concepts are not discrete, but make up a dynamic continuum between common sense terms, specific technical use, and professional knowledge, in an evolving institutional reality. Thus, the tension between a plural understanding of regulations and a more general understanding of law is bringing into view a new landscape in which general legal frameworks—grounded in well-known legal theories stemming from 20th-century c. legal positivism or sociological jurisprudence—are made compatible with specific forms of rights management on the Web. In this sense, Semantic Web tools are not only being designed for information retrieval, classification, clustering, and knowledge management. They can also be understood as regulatory tools, i.e. as components of the contemporary legal architecture, to be used by multiple stakeholders —front-line practitioners, policymakers, legal drafters, companies, market agents, and citizens. That is the issue broadly addressed in this Special Issue on the Semantic Web for the Legal Domain, overviewing the work carried out over the last fifteen years, and seeking to foster new research in this field, beyond the state of the art.

Keywords: Semantic Web for the Legal Domain, Ontologies, Linked Data, Semantic Web and its applications, Regulations, Rights

1. Introduction currently constitutes one of the most interesting topics in the scientific publishing domain. The Semantic Web has been devoted to addressing social Probably due to the success the Semantic Publishing issues from the outset. For instance, in the field’s best-known movement is having in academia, several publishing 4 5 seminal article [1], Tim Berners-Lee, Handler, and Lassila companies (e.g., the Nature Publishing Group and Elsevier ) 6 describe intelligent agents dialoguing and interacting between and journals (e.g., the Semantic Web Journal [65] and 7 each other in order to solve a particular medical scenario. Journal of Universal Computer Science ) are approaching However, in the early years of the Semantic Web, the main Semantic Publishing by releasing concrete datasets and effort went into background studies, where Artificial applications. These initiatives represent the first formal Intelligence (AI) and Knowledge Engineering (KE) were the endorsement of publishing-related industries in moving main actors on the scene. Activities mostly involved the towards Semantic Web technologies in real-case industrial development of new formal languages (e.g., RDF [33], RDFS scenarios. [19] and OWL [75]1), APIs (e.g., Jena [20] and OWLAPI On the other hand, the work carried out by Legal [61]), reasoners (e.g., Pellet [114] and Hermit [76]), ontology Information Institutes (LII)8 and the Free Access to Law development editors (e.g., Protégé [70] and the NeOn Toolkit Movement (FALM)9 deserves a mention. Based on the right [116]), and visualization tools (e.g., VOWL2 [72] and LODE of republication, they have devoted themselves, over the last [91][92]). twenty years, to providing free online access to case law, Only later, and standing on the shoulders of the legislation, treaties, law reforms, and legal scholarship.10 This aforementioned works, did people start to approach the is a significant contribution to the development of the rule of Semantic Web from different perspectives, such as law from a global point of view. engineering (i.e., Linked Data [12]), the social sciences (i.e., Their success is incontrovertible, because of its global Social Semantic Web [57]), and the hard sciences (i.e., Web scope. For example, the Cornell LII was visited last year by Science [60]). The Semantic Web then started to broaden its about 30 million different individuals from 246 countries and reach, moving from academia to other (more “applicative”) territories.11 AustLII12 shows similar results.13 Total hits for domains, such as industry, administration, and, last but not 2014 exceeded 223 million and averaged 611,545 hits per least, law—the very topic of this special issue. day. By the end of 2015 AustLII had 708 databases; 712 in In the following sections we want to spend a few words on February 2016.14 On average, it has been adding more than examples of applications of Semantic Web technologies to one new database every two weeks since it was started in these domains before presenting, in Section 7, five high- 1995.15 quality articles that have been selected for this special issue LII and FALM have been paying a close attention to of the Semantic Web for the Legal Domain. Semantic Web developments [93] to enable easier access to legal texts and improve their readability [32]. Let Thomas R. 2. Semantic Web, Industry, and Free Access to Bruce, director of the Cornell LII, freely provide some Law: Publishers Meet Semantics specific examples:16 “On the technical side, we employ Semantic Web According to the vision provided in foundational works technologies in a number of our features and collections. For [109][111][95][34], Semantic Publishing is the use of example, search of some portions of the US Code is enhanced Semantic Web technologies to enhance published documents with Linked Data from the DrugBank database, which directs (e.g., journal articles) in order to enable the definition of users who search for a brand-name drug to the regulations formal representations of their meaning, facilitate their that deal with the components of that drug (so, for example, a automatic discovery, enable their linking to semantically search for ‘panadol’ would give results similar to a search for related articles, provide access to data within articles in ‘acetaminophen’). We have, in prototype, a number of actionable form, and allow integration of data between features based on entity-linking techniques (so, for instance, papers. In particular, the ultimate aim of Semantic Publishing mentions of medical conditions in the sections dealing with is to semantically represent the intellectual discourse of a benefits for military veterans are linked to their document in machine-readable form, including how corresponding MESH entries, from which the user can arguments are modelled within the text. navigate to further medical information; in the past, we Since at least 2010, a number of initiatives have been proposed to promote Semantic Publishing to a broader audience, particularly triplestores (e.g., Open Citation Corpus 4 Nature Linked Data Platform: http://data.nature.com. [110][90] and the Open University Open Linked Data [126]), 5 Elsevier Linked Data Repository: http://data.elsevier.com. workshops (e.g., SePublica [45][46][47][48] and Linked 6 Semantic Web Journal Linked Data: http://semantic-web- Science [67][68][56]), special issues of academic journals journal.com/sejp/page/semanticWebJournal. (e.g., the Semantic Web Journal special issues on New 7 Journal of Universal Computer Science bibliographic database: Models of Semantic Publishing in Science [15] and on Linked http://jucs.org:8181/d2rq/. Data for Science and Education [69]), academic challenges 8 http://www.worldlii.org/. (e.g., the Semantic Publishing Challenge [101]), and research communities (e.g., Force113 [38]). These initiatives seem to 9 http://www.falm.info/. confirm that Semantic Publishing using Web standards 10 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Access_to_Law_Movement. 11 Cornell Legal Information Institute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/. 12 Australasian Legal Information Institute: http://www.austlii.edu.au/. 1 Even if the first drafts of such specifications were published starting from the end of the 20th century, here we decided to cite 13 only their earliest versions. http://www.austlii.edu.au/austlii/reports/2014/AustLII_YiR_2014.pdf 2 http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/vowl-2-user- 14 http://www.austlii.edu.au/databases.html. oriented-visualization-ontologies. 15 Graham Greenleaf, personal communication. 3 Force11: https://www.force11.org. 16 Tom Bruce, personal communication. classified agricultural regulations using AGROVOC, and 2016) freely available. All data are non-personal (for privacy linked regulations to related scientific papers classified with reasons) and, in principle, available in several data formats. that ontology). These prototype features come and go as we Each page describes a dataset and presents information about test them for viability, but will very soon be aggregated into a the formats used, its openness, its themes, and the timespan system of infocards that will show the user a great deal of covered by the dataset itself. The final goal of this project is related, linked data having to do with the things that a twofold. On the one hand, it aims to make governmental data particular law regulates or mentions, or that have to do with freely accessible online to the public. On the other hand, it its creator or enforcer. We’ve done a lot of related work on seeks to integrate such data within Open Linked Data [108]. metadata models for legislation for the Library of Congress, Similarly, the London Gazette,23 which is the journal of and some of our work on that has been adapted for use in the official public record of the British government and has been latest incarnation of the Government Publishing Office’s keeping a record of British public life for almost 350 years, FD/SYS online publications. We’ve also done a lot with the publishes all its materials as PDF files and HTML+RDFa automated extraction of statutory and regulatory definitions, [117] pages.24 The main part of semantic assertions described with particular attention to scoping language, in order to link through RDFa conforms to the Gazette Ontology,25 which all defined terms in the statutes and regulations back to the defines all classes and properties used for all Gazette Notices. relevant definitions.” A sister project of the previous one, i.e., Thus, LIIs set out the principles of legal information and legislation.gov.uk,26 managed by the National Archives27 on 17 FALM principles—the so-called Hague principles (2008) — behalf of the UK government,28 has recently released all UK 18 with Linked Open Data (LOD) [28][51] to enhance the legislation from 1267 to the present in several formats, quality of search and enrich the level of the information among which RDF/XML (including Akoma Ntoso [7][8], as provided. LIIs have recently launched a scholarly journal on we will explain shortly). The National Archives is the official 19 governance and models of legal publishing. archive and publisher for the UK government, and this portal This constitutes an example of the mixed public-private is the most important official digital repository of legislation business models that will proliferate in the new Web of Data in UK. scenarios [50], changing top-down and exclusively market- These kinds of initiatives by the aforementioned and other based approaches into more relational and flexible ways of local, regional, and national governments (Catalonia,29 handling regulations, services, and rights [21]. France,30 Italy,31 the Netherlands,32 Singapore,33 etc.) show how the adoption of Semantic Web technologies in the administrative domain is widespread even for concrete uses and applications. The European Data portal34 recently 3. Semantic Web and Public Administration: The launched the DCAT-AP version 1.1 (Application Profile for Open Government Data Movement Data Portals in Europe)35 metadata vocabulary, a common schema for harmonising descriptions about public sector Setting aside certain differences between civil- and datasets in Europe, reusing, among others, Eurovoc36 thesauri common-law countries, we take public administration to be a now available as OWL ontologies. general concept mainly referring to the public organisation and dynamic management and implementation of statutes, policies, and court decisions within a legal system within a local, regional, national, or international jurisdictional space. 23 London Gazette homepage: http://www.london-gazette.co.uk. The London Gazette is published by TSO (The Stationery Office) under It thus encompasses the work carried out by professional staff the superintendence of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (HMSO), in parliaments, governments, and courts. In the past few part of the National Archives. years, several countries have started to publish administrative 24 An example of an HTML+RDFa page in the London Gazette is data online as open data using open formats such as available at https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/L-58664-497223. RDF/XML [40], Turtle [102], and RDFa [1]. 25 The Gazzette Ontology: 20 For instance, since 2009, the US Government has started https://www.thegazette.co.uk/def/publication#. a process for creating and releasing governance data so as to 26 Legislation.gov.uk homepage: http://www.legislation.gov.uk. enable public access to datasets generated by the executive 21 27 The National Archives homepage: branch of the federal government (195,033 datasets as of http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk. February 26, 2016) [59]. 28 Government of the United Kingdom homepage: On the basis of that experience, the UK government’s https://www.gov.uk. 22 project data.gov.uk [108] was launched in January 2010 29 Open public data of the government of Catalonia: with the aim of making datasets containing data from several http://dadesobertes.gencat.cat. UK government departments (27,909 as of February 26, 30 Open platform for French public data: http://www.data.gouv.fr. 31 Italian public administration open data: http://www.dati.gov.it. 17 See the following presentations by Graham Greenleaf: 32 Dutch national open data platform: https://data.overheid.nl. http://ials.sas.ac.uk/events/docs/Free_Access_to_Law_Graham_Gree nleaf_IALS_2012.pdf; 33 Singapore government data: http://www.data.gov.sg. http://www.lvi2015.org/programme/papers/LVI2015_Graham_Differ 34 http://www.europeandataportal.eu/. ent_meanings_of_Civ-Com_LvI1115_4.pdf. 35 DCAT-AP is an action conducted by improving semantic 18 Australasian Legal Information Institute: interoperability in the European eGovernment systems of the http://www.austlii.edu.au/, Cornell Legal Information Institute: European Commission’s Interoperability Solutions for European https://www.law.cornell.edu/. Public Administrations (ISA) programme 19 Journal of Open Access to Law: http://ec.europa.eu/isa/actions/01-trusted-information-exchange/1- https://ojs.law.cornell.edu/index.php/joal. 1action_en. The specifications are available here: https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/system/files/project/dcat- 20 Open Government Initiative: http://www.whitehouse.gov/open. ap_version_1.1.pdf. 21 Data.gov homepage: http://www.data.gov. 36 http://eurovoc.europa.eu/drupal/sites/all/files/eurovoc- 22 Data.gov.uk homepage: http://data.gov.uk. consolidated.owl. At the European level, EUR-Lex and the Publication The second generation instead faces a large-scale collection Office has also made great strides during the last three of distributed semantic metadata and exploits the Semantic years.37 There is a freely accessible EU Metadata Registry.38 Web as a large-scale, heterogeneous, distributed semantic CELLAR, the new EU portal, serves on average some 5 resource [35]. This is changing the shape and structure of million requests per day. It contains 200 million identifiers regulations and the implementation of the law—the way legal and 1100 million triples in its Oracle RDF store.39 content can be accessed, circulated, used, changed, The Re-use of Public Sector Information Directive,40 implemented, and enforced. updated in 2013 (also known as the PSI Directive) sets out Early accounts of Law and the Semantic Web stressed the the conditions governing the right to reuse information work done on ontologies as early as the 1990s and in the first resources held by public sector bodies, including provisions stages of the Web [10]. Several national and EU Esprit, FP5, on non-discrimination, transparent licensing, and public FP6, and FP7 projects funded the construction or refinement accountability. This is fostering the creation of value-added of upper (foundational), core, and domain and linguistic information products and services (tools, apps, content) that ontologies [26].53 Among them are FOLaw (Functional take public sector information or data as a source (or even as Ontology of Law), based on normative knowledge, world their single source).41 Very recently, after a decade knowledge, responsibility knowledge, reactive knowledge of promoting Open Data and PSI reuse in Europe, the ePSI and creative knowledge [118][119]; FBO (Frame-Based Platform (created in 2006)42 shut down at the end of February Ontology of Law), based on norms, acts, and descriptions of 2016 and migrated to the new European Data Portal.43 In concepts [122][123]; LRI-Core Legal Ontology, based on 2013, the G8 started the Open Data Charter,44 which also objects, processes, physical entities, mental entities, agents, includes legal information as a pillar for enhancing law. and communicative acts [16][17]; CLO-Core Legal Ontology For this reason the Open Government Data movement is [41][43], based on the foundational ontology DOLCE+, and no longer limited to government organizations but extends its extended to a lexical ontology in the LOIS Project reach to other public bodies, especially to parliamentary (JurWordNet) [94][42]; OPJK (Ontology of Professional bodies (e.g., the Italian Parliament45 and the US House of Judicial Knowledge), designed to model the practical Representatives,46 the Open Government Partnership,47 and knowledge contained, not in legal documents, but in judges’ the National Library of Congress of Chile48), and the experience [29][25]; DALOS-Consumer Protection judiciary (the Open Justice Project in the UK,49 US Open Ontology, grounded in the results of the LOIS Project and 54 Data Justice,50 the California Initiative,51 the European Court importing top ontology concepts from CLO [2][3]; Legivoc, of Justice52). Moreover, thanks to the PSI Directive, the a Ministry of France project conducted with the support of emphasis is also placed on public documents, and not only on the European Commission. public data, enriched with RDF metadata. The methodological stages of knowledge representation, the iterative lifecycle of legal ontology building, and lessons 4. Semantic Web and the Law learned have been carefully explained and discussed in several monographs [62][14][27][89]. There are five The rise of the Web of Data, the increase of linked legal dimensions of law that have been addressed through data, and second-generation Semantic Web applications open computational modelling: the structure of legal documents, new scenarios for legal modelling. First-generation Semantic norms and normative systems, concepts and legal Web applications focused on corporate ontologies, using a conceptions, cases and precedents, argumentation and legal single—lightweight or thick—ontology to support the reasoning [107]. They were initially related to the integration of resources selected in a controlled environment. development of domain-independent ontologies for knowledge-sharing and reuse, mainly as knowledge- interchange formats for knowledge-based systems. Early 37 EUR-Lex Access to European Union Law: http://eur- legal ontologies were formalised using ONTOLINGUA, lex.europa.eu/homepage.html. LOOM, and DAML+OIL, with an increasing preference for 38 http://publications.europa.eu/mdr/. W3C standards, Semantic Web languages (OWL DL), editors 39 Fulgencio Sanmartín, personal communication. such as Protégé, and reasoners such as Pellet [18]. 40 Directive 2013/37/EU of the European Parliament and of the Scalability, reusability, and end user-centred approaches Council of 26 June 2013 amending Directive 2003/98/EC on the re- were taken into account to model specific legal domains, use of public sector information : http://eur- mainly e-commerce, e-administration, e-governance, criminal lex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=consleg:2003l0098:20130 law, consumer law, mediation, drafting, and contracting. The 717:en:pdf. increasing weight of Semantic Web languages has helped to 41 Legal Aspects of Public Sector Information Thematic Network Outputs (LAPSI): https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/news/legal- aspects-public-sector-information-lapsi-thematic-network-outputs. 53 (i) CLIME – Computerised Legal Information Management and 42 http://www.epsiplatform.eu/. Explanation (1998–2001): http://www.2020-horizon.com/CLIME- 43 http://www.europeandataportal.eu/. Computerised-legal-information-management-and-explanation: http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/38647_en.html; (ii) OntoWeb – 44 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/open-data-charter. Ontology-Based Information Exchange for Knowledge Management 45 Italian Senate (http://dati.senato.it/) and Chamber of Deputies of and Electronic Commerce (2000–02): Italy, and the project Normattiva: http://www.normattiva.it/. http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/60847_en.html; (iii) e-COURT – 46 http://xml.house.gov/. Electronic Court: Judicial IT-Based Management (2001–2003): http://cordis.europa.eu/project/rcn/56906_en.html; (iv) e-POWER – 47 http://www.opengovpartnership.org/groups/legislative. European Program for an Ontology Based Working Environment for 48 http://library.ifla.org/1048/1/121-cifuentes-es.pdf. Regulations and Legislation (2001–03); (v) SEKT – Semantically 49 http://open.justice.gov.uk/. Enabled Knowledge Technologies (2003–06): http://www.sekt- project.com/; (vi) ALIS (2006–09): http://www.alisproject.eu/; (vii) 50 http://www.justice.gov/open/open-data. DALOS – Drafting Legislation with Ontology-Based Support (2007- 51 https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/. 2008): http://www.dalosproject.eu/. 52 http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/j_6/. 54 http://legivoc.org/. shape a more pragmatic approach, envisaging Web services, “With time to spare, she pulls out her iPad and jumps community participation, and a growing involvement of legal online using her own data plan—not the suspicious public experts, especially in knowledge-acquisition, validation, and WiFi. She quickly reviews the email, which details the implementation processes. client’s issues with a recently hired employee. Seconds later Thus, the way of modelling legal knowledge can be quite she has an employment contract she drafted open on the iPad, flexible, depending on the epistemic assumptions in the accessed from her secure cloud-based document management knowledge acquisition process, the selected requirements, system. and the final purposes of the tool, application, or system at “She uses a simple annotation app on the iPad to highlight stake. The next step is to lean on lessons learned over the past key language in the contract and add explanatory comments. fifteen years. She then exports the annotated contract to her email app, In early 2005, a project funded by the United Nations, types a brief memo explaining her thoughts on the matter, Akoma Ntoso, was launched to enable citizens to exercise and sends it off to the client (with a CC: to her practice their right to access African parliamentary proceedings and management system so the email is filed and flagged for later deliberations, while supporting Parliaments in managing time entry).” legislative documentation [125][8][87][82].55 This work was “Throughout this brief interlude, the lawyer has never left also immediately followed by an on-going effort to her seat in the airport terminal, and she’s used nothing more standardise its result within three OASIS technical than her iPad and her Apple Watch. Her client need never committees [6]. know. From his perspective, she may as well have been Akoma Ntoso did not start in a vacuum. Almost in behind a vast mahogany desk aided by a small army of legal parallel, MetaLex emerged in 2002 from several past EU assistants. The quality of service is the same.” projects and was proposed as a legal XML standard. In 2006, This is not an uncommon situation. The picture could be it evolved into CEN-MetaLex as a general format for the completed by adding some utilities: semantic contracts, exchange and interoperability of legal documents [14]. It automated structuring of the content of contracts, personal adopts and adapts the concepts introduced in the FRBR access to large databases, smart tools for reorganising the specification [Functional Requirements for Bibliographic relevant legal knowledge. This is not so far off now. Shared Records of the International Federation of Library information from heterogeneous systems, personalisation, Associations]. This work had a follow-up in the EU Project context awareness, and interaction are features of the ESTRELLA,56 in which the ontology for Legal Knowledge Semantic Web. Consumer-generated data is growing at an Interchange Format-LKIF was finally created [62][18][63]. unprecedented pace—a 2,000% increase in global data is LKIF was used in several projects to model deeper legal expected by 2020 [28]— and companies, lawyers, and law concepts [86] and represent legal documents. Several firms are quite aware of this. ontologies were developed on top of the work done in CEN- New emerging issues are also important in the MetaLex and on Akoma Ntoso: an ontology for managing a development of markets and the evolving entwinement of law legislative text’s evolution over time and its linguistic and the Web of Data. Trust, transparency, metadata markets, variants [78][1]; an ontology for managing modifications of licensing, statistical and big-data governance, privacy, data norms [82][84]; an ontology for modelling relations between protection, security, and intangible legal goods such as authorities, agents, and roles in the process of producing a intellectual property and patents are fostering new modes of legal document [7]. cooperation between legal experts and Semantic Web developers. 5. The Web of Data and the Law: A Step Forward Ontology-driven systems with reasoning capabilities in the legal field are now better understood. Legal concepts are not A quick look at the 2015 Legal Technology Survey Report discrete but make up a dynamic continuum between common 57 of the ABA Legal Technology Resource Center shows the sense terms, specific technical uses, and professional growing implications of legal professionals as a data-driven knowledge in an evolving institutional reality [120]. Thus, community. Trending topics are practice-management the tension between a plural understanding of regulations and software and the nascent virtual law practice (although only a more general understanding of law is bringing into view a 5% of lawyers in the overall sample locate themselves under new landscape in which general legal frameworks—grounded this label). Here is a vignette of the “virtual lawyer” as in well-known legal theories stemming from 20th-century portrayed by Joshua Poje, director of the American Bar legal positivism or sociological jurisprudence—are made Association Law Practice Division [99]: compatible with specific forms of rights management on the “Imagine a lawyer stranded at the airport. Her flight home Web. In this sense, Semantic Web tools are not only being to visit family has been delayed, as so often happens. She’s designed for information retrieval, classification, clustering, debating how to fill her time when her Apple Watch issues a and knowledge management. They can also be understood as gentle tap on her wrist. It’s an alert about an email from an regulatory tools, i.e., as components of the contemporary important client—a small business she has represented in a legal architecture, to be used by multiple stakeholders— wide range of matters. front-line practitioners, policymakers, legal drafters, companies, market agents, and citizens. This has given a new boost to Digital Rights Management 55 Architecture for Knowledge-Oriented Management of African (DRM)58 [44], Rights Expression Languages (REL) [105], Normative Texts using Open Standards and Ontologies, a.k.a., and Open Digital Rights Languages (ODR)59 [66]. They are Akoma Ntoso, http://www.akomantoso.org/. quite diverse and may not have the same legal status 56 Standardized Transparent Representations in order to Extend Legal Accessibility, ESTRELLA (2006–2008): http://www.estrellaproject.org/ 58 57 https://www.w3.org/community/pua/wiki/Digital_Rights_Manageme http://www.americanbar.org/groups/departments_offices/legal_techn nt. ology_resources/publications.html. 59 https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/. (depending on national and international jurisdictions). But Alternatives —common practices in the Web as against all three initiatives are market, governance, and policy formal standards— are not necessarily antagonistic. Industry regulators, and on top of them SW languages can be used to demands that common languages, formats, and specifications generate the automated selection and aggregation of relevant that are already in use receive the imprimatur of information to perform legal acts. Information from disparate standardisation bodies to encourage fluent exchanges of data and heterogeneous sources often produces incompatible or and digital goods. This demand is slowly shifting from XML contradictory results, and these kinds of problems need to be formats to RDF models and Semantic Web technologies. One tackled in advance [53]. For instance, Natural Language example of this is what has taken place within the MPEG-21 Processing and the representation of norms in RuleML can be ecosystem, which initially had space for specifying XML used to perform business contracts; Ontology Design Patterns schemata but more recently turned to OWL ontologies, as (ODP) make it possible to reuse core-conceptual structures in illustrated in this Special Issue [73]. linked data licensing [106]. At stake are rule [52][85][28] and Much of this shift can be attributed to trends in the legal compliance (by design) [30], trust [5], and the technology world, but some can be grounded in the fact that specification of standards (such as fairness or transparency). the overall focus when dealing with legal data is shifting This is leading to new approaches to ethics [37] and law [81], from a need to publish documents (on paper and online) to an and new research on the stages and forms of the rule of law effort to produce complex applications providing some kind for the Web of Data [22][23]. of legal reasoning. This is certainly risky, because imposing a Consider, too, that consensus and disagreement are textual or positivistic approach on all countries, cultures, and equally present both on the Web and in the actual law- political bodies of different natures should be avoided. The making processes. Recent path analyses of the evolution of challenge is to balance the use of technical standards with the intellectual property rights show that international patent emerging patterns of social and political behaviour. systems were still under construction moving into 2000 [73]. Standards for legal documents are reacting accordingly. This fact changed dramatically in the 21st century, owing in While the first and second generations of standards for legal part to a new extremely competitive framework, nationally and legislative documents were mostly national, and mostly and internationally alike, and to the economic success of the aimed at generating printed and online representation of 60 Web. The launching of the Creative Commons in 2001, legislative texts, current standards are looking to reach Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) systems [71], crisis-and- agreements on a more general framework. disaster management platforms (such as USHAIDI),61 and Given that text documents are still very much the core crowd-sourced systems for constitutional and legal drafting material produced by legal professionals, and that references purposes62 [74] incorporate new kinds of social regulations to text documents will remain the basis for grounded and based on participation, Open Source Intelligence (OSINT), verifiable legal reasoning regardless of the actors and and Social Intelligence63 (SI) [97]. Different private and technologies employed, current generation standards in the public, individual and collective, interests have to be legal domain are providing a layered organization of their balanced and harmonised in a transparent and accountable offerings: presentation-oriented XML is being replaced with manner, especially when security and data-protection structured XML with ample room for metadata and principles need to be implemented to protect citizens and annotations; naming mechanisms based on URIs and IRIs citizens’ rights at the same time. This objective can be provide linkable anchors both to entire documents and to advanced by forming synergies between Agreement smaller fragments; and document-oriented ontologies provide Technologies [80], Normative Multi-Agent Systems the necessary glue between abstract legal reasoning and the (NorMAS) [4], and the Semantic Web. textual pieces of supporting evidence. Within OASIS, for instance, three Technical Committees 6. Standardisation Trends are actively working to produce a flexible, comprehensive, and wide-reaching platform for the digital representation of There is an important standardisation effort in the interplay legal documents and their content: the LegalDocML TC64 has between Web languages and the Semantic Web and legal inherited the Akoma Ntoso XML vocabulary from the early knowledge. It is true that most behaviours on the Web seem UN-based African initiative and is extending its expressive to be implicit. Best practices and norms are not often made power to support the structuring of legal and legislative explicit [100]. However, even recognizing that standards and documents, making sure that its constructs, including technologies make sense only to the extent that they are metadata, are immediately expressible as RDF statements and deployed, and that many de facto standards emerged not from amenable for evaluation in Semantic Web applications. standardisation bodies but bottom-up, there is huge room for 65 improvement and rationalisation in the interface of law and The LegalCiteM TC is providing digital representation the Semantic Web. Supporting such a rationale for the law of legal citations fostering a convergence of many existing syntaxes for legal and legislative references, including ELI,66 actually triggers and fosters the development of the Web. 67 68 Recent surveys on the quality of XML documents on the ECLI, URN-LEX, and the Akoma Ntoso Naming Web show that 85.4% (n=180 K) are well-formed and 99.5% of all specified encodings is correct [54]. Even so, much of the Linked Open Data available on the Web is far from the five-star level [9], and about 40% of linked datasets have 64 https://www.oasis- been published without a license [124], i.e., without open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=legalxml-legislative. appropriate legal coverage. 65 https://www.oasis- open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=legalcitem. 66 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- 60 https://creativecommons.org/. content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV%3Ajl0068. 61 https://www.ushahidi.com/. 67 https://e- justice.europa.eu/content_european_case_law_identifier_ecli-175- 62 http://constitutionlab.org/. en.do. 63 http://www.sintelnet.eu/. 68 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-spinosa-urn-lex-09. Convention,69 making sure that Linked Data collections of In “Semantic Model for Legal Resources: Annotation and legal facts and data can refer back to the specific parts of the Reasoning over Normative Provisions” [39], Enrico legal and legislative documents where they come from. Francesconi presents an OWL 2 DL ontology for describing Finally, LegalRuleML TC70 [59] is providing a framework normative provisions (in terms of Hohfeldian legal for expressing in a formal language the constitutive and fundamental relations) and related axioms in order to enable prescriptive rules and constraints of which norms and advanced access to legislative documents. The discussion is regulative texts are made. LegalRuleML also provides an supported by examples of semantic annotations of legal RDFS meta-model for the deontic and defeasible logic textual resources using RDF/OWL standards and of SPARQL operators applied in the legal domain in order to export the queries for accessing and reasoning over provisions. This is metadata in RDF. framed on CELLAR. In “An OWL Ontology Library Representing Judicial But this is all still under development, and must be Interpretations” [31], Marcello Ceci and Aldo Gangemi carefully validated and tested through an on-going introduce an OWL 2 DL ontology library making it possible implementation process in different scenarios. Policies, social to describe the interpretations a judge makes of the law while regulations, ethics, and law are deeply intertwined. Thus, engaging in the legal reasoning on which basis a case is Semantic Web technologies can also be applied on specific adjudicated. This ontology library is based on a theoretical service-oriented approaches, focusing on social problems model and on some specific patterns that exploit some new such as the administrative implementation of immigration features introduced by OWL 2, and it provides meaningful laws and policies in a specific jurisdiction. In this way, legal semantics, while retaining a strong connection to source methodology, ontology-building, and epistemology can be documents (i.e., fragments of legal texts). kept in separate clusters, and different dimensions can be In “LOTED2: An Ontology of European Public combined ad hoc to tailor specific solutions. Legal Procurement Notices” [36] Isabella Distinto, Mathieu isomorphism and the so-called scoping problem [121]—the d’Aquin, and Enrico Motta describe the construction of the extraction of implicit meaning from general regulations with LOTED2 ontology for the representation of European public concrete aims and targets in a given context—can be tackled procurement notices. LOTED2 is a legal ontology that in an ordered and relational manner, making it possible to supports the identification of legal concepts and, more create scenarios with lay and expert participation alike generally, of legal reasoning. In particular, it seeks to strike a [112][113]. compromise between the accurate representation of legal So, too, new general frameworks can be added to an concepts and the usability of the ontology as a knowledge emerging contemporary legal landscape for the Web of Data. model for Semantic Web applications, while creating Customary international private law cannot be easily connections to other relevant ontologies in the domain. modelled without taking all stakeholders into account. The In “PPROC, an Ontology for Transparency in Public general balance between privacy, data protection, and Procurement” [77], Jose Félix Muñoz-Soro, Guillermo security [58] seems to broaden the legal normative scope for Esteban, Oscar Corcho, and Francisco Serón introduce the regulating, among other elements, linked data markets [115], PPROC Ontology—an ontology that enables the description co-regulatory instruments [98], self-regulated collective of procurement processes and contracts. The authors focus in awareness and informed consent [88], the behaviour of LEAs particular on making the ontology appropriate for describing behaviour (law enforcement agents)71 [24], and the use of the standard data relating to the tender (i.e., objectives, multi-lingual and multi-jurisdictional term banks [103]. deadlines, awardees) and the details of the whole process of Distributed geospatial data, textual data, and controlled publishing and performing contracts. vocabularies can be combined to create interactive tools to In “Overview of the MPEG-21 Media Contract Ontology” enhance the rule of law and the specific legal information that [104] Víctor Rodríguez-Doncel, Jaime Delgado, Sílvia citizens would need to perform legal acts [64]. Visualisation Llorente, Eva Rodríguez, and Laurent Boch present the tools can enhance citizens’ confidence and trust, saving time MPEG-21 Media Contract Ontology (MCO), an ontology and effort [96]. Legal Open Data can be elevated to the level enabling the description of contracts dealing with rights to of Linked Open Data by transforming texts into vectors, multimedia assets and, more generally, with any content selecting suitable terms, and using a weighting function as protected by intellectual property. The ontology is composed part of the frequency calculation, increasing the degree of of a core model (describing permissions, obligations, and public accessibility [13].72 prohibitions in contracts) and a specific vocabulary These new trends are still to be explored further, but they representing the common rights and constraints in the audio- certainly suggest the promise of hybrid models of regulation visual context. The paper also includes a description of the and synergy among (and in between) legislation, Court design principles and the methodology followed in decisions, the economy, policy, and Semantic Web developing the ontology, as well as several examples of it in technologies. RDF and a description of related tools. 7. Overview of This Special Issue 8. Acknowledgements This special issue on the use of Semantic Web We would like to thank all the authors of accepted and technologies to address Legal Domain issues and scenarios rejected articles, as well as the editors-in-chief of Semantic brings together five high-quality contributions, out of eight Web Journal, Pascal Hitzler and Krzysztof Janowicz, for all submissions we originally received. their support and help. A heartfelt thanks goes to all the people who have made this high-quality special issue 69 http://docs.oasis-open.org/legaldocml/akn-nc/v1.0/akn-nc- possible. This is devoted in particular to our reviewers (in v1.0.html. alphabetical order): Gioele Barabucci, Nick Bassiliades, Eva 70 https://www.oasis- Blomqvist, Guido Boella, Thomas Bruce, Nuria Casellas, open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=legalruleml. Paolo Ciccarese, Jaime Delgado, Stefan Dietze, Angelo Di 71 http://www.fp7-caper.eu/. Iorio, Miriam Fernández (two articles), Meritxell Fernández 72 http://eucases.eu/start/. Barrera, Enrico Francesconi, Aldo Gangemi, Jorge Gracia, Guido Governatori, Laura Hollink, Renato Iannella, Andrew structures in Akoma Ntoso. In Casanovas, P., Pagallo, Koster, José Manuel López-Cobo, Adrian Paschke, Ginevra U., Palmirani, M., Sartor, G. (Eds.), AI Approaches to Peruginelli, Axel Polleres, Marta Sabou, Marco the Complexity of Legal Systems. Complex Systems, Schorlemmer, Daniela Tiscornia, Serena Villata, John the Semantic Web, Ontologies, Argumentation, and Zeleznikow, and Jun Zhao. Dialogue, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 6237: We also warmly thank Graham Greenleaf, Tom Bruce, 133–149. Berlin, Germany: Springer. DOI: Fulgencio Sanmartín, and Enrico Francesconi for providing 10.1007/978-3-642-16524-5_9 us useful updated information about AustLII, Cornell’s LII, [9] Beek, W., Groth, P., Schlobach, S., & Hoekstra, R. and CELLAR. (2014). A web observatory for the machine A special mention needs to go to Rinke Hoekstra: not only processability of structured data on the web. In has he given us continuous support and encouragement, but Proceedings of the 2014 ACM conference on Web he has also managed to review three of the articles. science (WebScience 2014): 249–250. New York, New The edition of this special issue on the Semantic Web for York, US: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/2615569.2615654 the Legal Domain has been partly supported by the national [10] Benjamins, V. R., Casanovas, P., Breuker, J., & project DER2012-39492-C02-01-CRWDSOURCING, the Gangemi, A. (Eds.) (2005). Law and the Semantic EU projects CAPER- CA-261712 and 520250-1-2011-1-IT- Web: Legal Ontologies, Methodologies, Legal ERA MUNDUS-EMJD, and the Australian Project Data to Information Retrieval, and Applications. Lecture Notes Decisions (D2D) Cooperative Research Centre (CRC). in Artificial Intelligence 3369. Berlin, Germany: Springer. ISBN: 978-3-540-25063-0 [11] Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001). The References Semantic Web. Scientific American, 284 (5): 34–43. DOI: 10.1038/scientificamerican0501-34 [1] Adida, B., Birbeck, M., McCarron, S., & Herman, I. [12] Bizer, C., Heath, T., & Berners-Lee, T. (2009). Linked (2013). RDFa Core 1.1 - Second Edition: Syntax and Data – The Story So Far. International Journal on processing rules for embedding RDF through attributes. Semantic Web and Information Systems, 5(3): 1–22. W3C Recommendation, 22 August 2013. World Wide DOI: 10.4018/jswis.2009081901 Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/ [13] Boella, G., Di Caro, L., Graziadei, M., Cupi, L., [2] Agnoloni, T., Bacci, L., Francesconi, E., Spinosa, P., Salaroglio, C. E., Humphreys, L., Konstantinov, H., Tiscornia, D., Montemagni, S. & Venturi, G. (2010). Marko, K., Robaldo, L., Ruffini, C., & Simov, K. Building an ontological support for multilingual (2015). Linking legal open data: breaking the legislative drafting. In Lodder, R., Mommers L. (Eds.), accessibility and language barrier in European In Legal knowledge and information systems, Frontiers legislation and case law. In Proceedings of the 15th in artificial intelligence and a applications 165: 9–18. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press. Law (ICAIL 2015): 171–175. New York, New York, [3] Agnoloni, T., L. Bacci, E. Francesconi, W. Peters, S. US: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/2746090.2746106 Montamegni, & Venturi, G. (2009). A two level [14] Boer, A. (2011). Legal Theory, Sources of Law, and knowledge approach to support multilingual legislative the Semantic Web. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence drafting. In Breuker, J., Casanovas, P., Klein, M., and Applications 195. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Francesconi, E. (Eds.), Law, ontologies and the IOS Press. ISBN: 978-1-60750-003-2 Semantic Web, Frontiers in artificial intelligence and applications, 188: 177–198. Amsterdam, The [15] Clark, T. (2014). Next Generation Scientific Publishing Netherlands: IOS Press. DOI: 10.3233/978-1-58603- and the Web of Data. Semantic 5 (4): 257–259. DOI: 942-4-177 10.3233/SW-140139 [4] Andriguetto, G., Governtori G., Noriega, P., & van der [16] Breuker, J. (2004). Constructing a legal core ontology: Torre, L. (Eds.) (2013). Normative Multi-Agent LRI-Core. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Systems. Dagstuhl, Germany: Shloss-Dagstuhl Ontologies and their Applications: 115–126. Publishing. [17] Breuker, J., & Hoekstra, R. (2004). Epistemology and [5] Artz, D., & Gil, Y. (2007). A survey of trust in ontology in core ontologies: FOLaw and LRI-Core, two computer science and the Semantic Web. Web core ontologies for law. In Gangemi, A., Borgo, S. Semantics, 5 (2): 58–71. DOI: (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Core 10.1016/j.websem.2007.03.002 Ontologies in Ontology Engineering 2004, CEUR Workshop Proceedings 118. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol- [6] Athan, T., Governatori, G., Palmirani, M., Paschke, A. 118/paper2.pdf & Wyner, A. (2015). LegalRuleML: Design Principles and Foundations. In Faber, W., Paschke, A. (Eds.), [18] Breuker, J., Hoekstra, R., Boer, A., van den Berg, K., Reasoning Web. Web Logic Rules, Lecture Notes in Rubino, R., Sartor, G., Palmirani, M., Wyner, A., & Computer Science 9203: 151–188. Berlin, Germany: Bench-Capon, T. (2007) OWL ontology of basic legal Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-21768-0_6 concepts (LKIF-core). Deliverable 1.4 D.1.4, ESTRELLA project (IST-2004-027655). [7] Barabucci, G., Cervone, L., Di Iorio A., Palmirani, M., http://dare.uva.nl/record/1/276051 Peroni, S., & Vitali F. (2010). Managing semantics in XML vocabularies: an experience in the legal and [19] Brickley, D., & Guha, R. V. (2014). RDF Schema 1.1. legislative domain. In Proceedings of Balisage: The W3C Recommendation, 25 February 2014. World Markup Conference 2010, Balisage Series on Markup Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf- Technologies 5. DOI: schema/ 10.4242/BalisageVol5.Barabucci01 [20] Carroll, J. J., Dickinson, I., Dollin, C., Reynolds, D., [8] Barabucci, G., Cervone, L., Palmirani, M., Peroni, S., Seaborne, A., & Wilkinson, K. (2004). Jena: & Vitali, F. (2010). Multi-layer markup and ontological implementing the semantic web recommendations. In Proceedings of the Alternate track papers & posters of New York, New York, US: ACM. DOI: the 13th international World Wide Web conference 10.1145/1276318.1276328 (WWW 2004): 74–83. New York, New York, US: [30] Casellas, N., Nieto, J. E., Meroño, A., Roig, A., ACM. DOI: 10.1145/1013367.1013381. Torralba, S., Reyes, M., & Casanovas, P. (2010). [21] Casanovas, P. (2009). The Future of Law: Relational Ontological Semantics for Data Privacy Compliance: Law and Next Generation of Web Services. In The NEURONA Project. In 2010 AAAI Spring Fernández-Barrera, M., de Filippi, P., Nuno-Andrade, Symposium Series, Intelligent Information Privacy N., Viola de Azevedo-Cunha, M., Sartor G., & Management. Casanovas, P. (Eds.), The Future of Law and http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS10/paper/vi Technology: Looking into the Future – Selected ew/1071/1476 Essays, Legal Information and Communication [31] Ceci, M., & Gangemi, A. (2016). An OWL ontology Technologies Series 7: 137–156. Florence, Italy: library representing judicial interpretations. Semantic European Press Academic Publishing. Web, 7 (3). DOI: 10.3233/SW-140146 http://www.ejls.eu/6/205UK.htm [32] Curtotti, M., McCreath, E., Bruce, T., Frug, S., Weibel, [22] Casanovas, P. (2015). Semantic Web Regulatory W., & Ceynowa, N. (2015). Machine learning for Models: Why Ethics Matter, Philosophy and readability of legislative sentences. In Proceedings of Technology. In Information Society and Ethical the 15th International Conference on Artificial Inquiries, Philosophy & Technology, 28 (1): 33–55. Intelligence and Law: 53–62. New York, New York, DOI: 10.1007/s13347-014-0170-y US: ACM. DOI: 10.1145/2746090.2746095 [23] Casanovas, P. (2015). Conceptualisation of Rights and [33] Cyganiak, R., Wood, D., & Lanthaler, M. (2014). RDF Meta-Rule of Law for the Web of Data. Democracia 1.1 Concepts and Abstract Syntax. W3C Digital e Governo Eletrônico 12 (1): 18- 41. Rep. Recommendation, 25 February 2014. World Wide Web Journal of Governance and Regulation, 4 (4): 118-129. Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/ http://buscalegis.ufsc.br/revistas/index.php/observatorio doegov/article/viewFile/34399/33229 [34] De Waard, A. (2010). From Proteins to Fairytales: Directions in Semantic Publishing. IEEE Intelligent [24] Casanovas, P., Arraiza, J., Melero, F., González- Systems, 25 (2): 83–88. DOI: 10.1109/MIS.2010.49 Conejero, J., Molcho, G., & Cuadros, M. (2014). Fighting Organized Crime Through Open Source [35] d'Aquin M., Motta, E., Sabou M., Angeletou S., Gridinoc L., Lopez V. & Guidi D. (2008). Toward a Intelligence: Regulatory Strategies of the CAPER Project. In Hoekstra, R. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 27th new generation of semantic web applications. IEEE annual conference on Legal Knowledge and Intelligent Systems, 23 (3): 20–28. DOI: 10.1109/MIS.2008.54 Information Systems (JURIX 2014), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 271: 189-199. [36] Distinto, I., d’Aquin, M. & Motta, E. (2016). LOTED2: Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press. DOI: An Ontology of European Public Procurement Notices. 10.3233/978-1-61499-468-8-189 Semantic Web, 7 (3). DOI: 10.3233/SW-140151 [25] Casanovas, P., Casellas, N., Vallbé, J.J., Poblet, M., [37] Floridi, L. (2013). The Ethics of Information. Oxford, Benjamins, V.R., Blázquez, M., Peña-Ortiz, R. & UK: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 978-0-19964-132- Contreras, J. (2006). Semantic Web: A legal case study. 1 In Davies, J., Studer, R., Warren, P. (Eds.), Semantic [38] Force11. (2012). Force11 White Paper: Improving The Web technology: Trends and research in ontology- Future of Research Communications and e-Scholarship. based systems: 259–260. Hoboken, New Jersey, US: White paper, 19 February 2012. Force11. Wiley. DOI: 10.1002/047003033X.ch12 https://www.force11.org/white_paper [26] Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Rubino, R. & Casellas, N. [39] Francesconi, E. (2016). Semantic Model for Legal (Eds.) (2008). Computable models of the law. Resources: Annotation and Reasoning over Normative Languages, Dialogues, Games, Ontologies. Lecture Provisions. Semantic Web, 7 (3). DOI: 10.3233/SW- Notes in Computer Science 4884. Heidelberg, 140150 Germany: Springer. ISBN: 978-3-540-85568-2 [40] Gandon, F., & Schreiber, G. (2014). RDF 1.1 XML [27] Casellas, N. (2011). Legal ontology engineering: Syntax. W3C Recommendation, 25 February 2014. methodologies, modelling trends, and the ontology of World Wide Web Consortium. professional judicial knowledge. Law, Governance and http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/ Technology Series 3. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: [41] Gangemi, A. (2007). Design Patterns for Legal Springer. ISBN: 978-94-007-1496-0 Ontology Constructions. In Casanovas, P., Biasiotti, M. [28] Casellas, N., Bruce, T. R., Frug, S., Bouwman, S., Dias, A., Francesconi, E., Sagri, M. T. (Eds.), Proceedings of D., Lin, J., Marathe, S., Rai, K., Singh, A., Sinha, D., & the Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Venkataraman, S. (2012). Linked Legal Data: Intelligence Techniques (LOAIT 2007), CEUR Improving Access to Regulations. In Proceedings of the Workshop Proceedings 321: 65–85. http://ceur- 13th Annual International Conference on Digital ws.org/Vol-321/paper4.pdf Government Research (DGO 2012): 280–281. New [42] Gangemi, A., Sagri, M. T., & Tiscornia, D. (2003). Jur- York, New York, US: ACM. DOI: Wordnet, a Source of Metadata for Content Description 10.1145/2307729.2307785 in Legal Information. Proceedings of the 2003 [29] Casellas, N., Casanovas, P., Vallbé, J.-J., Poblet, M., Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Web based legal Blázquez, M., Contreras, J., López-Cobo, J. M., & information management. Benjamins, V. R. (2007). Semantic enhancement for [43] Gangemi, A., Sagri, M. T., & Tiscornia, D. (2005). A legal information retrieval: Iuriservice performance. In constructive framework for legal ontologies. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Benjamins, V.R., Casanovas, P., Breuker, J., Gangemi, Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2007): 49–57. A. (Eds.), Law and the Semantic Web, Lecture Notes in SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 45 (2): Artificial Intelligence 3369: 97–124. Berlin, Germany: 44–48. DOI: 10.1145/2766330.2766338 Springer. DOI: 10.1145/371316.371517 [56] Groth, P., van Erp, M., Kauppinen, T., Zhao, J., Keßler, [44] García, R., Gil, R., & Delgado, J. (2007). A web C., Pouchard, L. C., … van Ossenbruggen, J. (Eds.). ontologies framework for digital rights management. (2013). Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop Artificial Intelligence and Law, 15 (2): 137–154. DOI: on Linked Science (LISC2013), CEUR Workshop 10.1007/s10506-007-9032-6 Proceedings 1116. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1116 [45] Garcia Castro, A., Lange, C., Lord, P., & Stevens, R. [57] Gruber, T. (2008). Collective knowledge systems: (Eds.). (2013). Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Where the Social Web meets the Semantic Web. Web Semantic Publishing (SePublica 2013), CEUR Semantics, 6(1): 4–13. DOI: Workshop Proceedings 994. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-994 10.1016/j.websem.2007.11.011 [46] Garcia Castro, A., Lange, C., Lord, P., & Stevens, R. [58] Gutwirth, S., De Hert, P., & Leenes, R. (Eds.) (2015). (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Reforming European Data Protection Law. Dordrecht, Semantic Publishing (SePublica 2014), CEUR The Netherlands: Springer. ISBN: 978-94-017-9384-1 Workshop Proceedings 1155. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol- [59] Hendler, J., Holm, J., Musialek, C., & Thomas, G. 1155 (2012). US Government Linked Open Data: [47] Garcia Castro, A., Lange, C., Sandhaus, E., & de Semantic.data.gov. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 27 (3): Waard, A. (Eds.). (2011). Proceedings of the 1st 25–31. DOI: 10.1109/MIS.2012.27 Workshop on Semantic Publishing (SePublica 2011), [60] Hendler, J., Shadbolt, N., Hall, W., Berners-Lee, T., & CEUR Workshop Proceedings 721. http://ceur- Weitzner, D. (2008). Web science: an interdisciplinary ws.org/Vol-721 approach to understanding the web. Communications of [48] Garcia Castro, A., Lange, C., van Harmelen, F., & the ACM, 51 (7): 60–69. DOI: Good, B. (Eds.). (2012). Proceedings of the 2nd 10.1145/1364782.1364798 Workshop on Semantic Publishing (SePublica 2012), [61] Horridge, M., & Bechhofer, S. (2011). The OWL API: CEUR Workshop Proceedings 903. http://ceur- A Java API for OWL ontologies. Semantic Web, 2 (1): ws.org/Vol-903 11–21. DOI: 10.3233/SW-2011-0025. [49] Gianfelice D., Lesmo L., Palmirani M., Perlo D., & [62] Hoekstra, R. (2009). Ontology representation: Design Radicioni D. P. (2013). Modificatory Provision patterns and ontologies that make sense. Frontiers in Detection: a Hybrid NLP Approach. In Proceedings of th artificial intelligence and applications 197. Amsterdam, the 14 International Conference on Artificial The Netherlands: IOS Press. ISBN: 978-1-60750-013-1 Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2013): [1] 43–52. New York, New York, US: ACM. DOI: [63] Hoekstra, R., Breuker, J., Bello, M. D., & Boer, A. 10.1145/2514601.2514607 (2009). LKIF core: Principled ontology development for the legal domain. In Breuker, J., Casanovas, P., [50] Greenleaf, G., (2009). AustLII's Business Models: Klein, M. C. A., Francesconi, E. (Eds.), Law, Constraints and Opportunities in Funding Free Access ontologies and the Semantic Web: Channelling the to Law. In Peruginelli, G., Ragona, M. (Eds.), Free legal information flood, Frontiers in artificial Access, Quality Information, Effectiveness of Rights: intelligence and applications 188: 21–52. Amsterdam, 423–436. Florence, Italy: Publishing Academic Press. The Netherlands: IOS Press. DOI: 10.3233/978-1- [51] Greenleaf, G., Mowbray, A., & Chung, P. (2013). 58603-942-4-21 Meaning of Free Access to Legal Information: A [64] Hoekstra, R., Winkels, R., & Hupkes, E. (2010). Spatial Twenty Year Evolution. Journal of Open Access to planning on the Semantic Web. Transactions in GIS, 14 Law, 1 (1): (2): 147–161. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9671.2010.01188.x https://ojs.law.cornell.edu/index.php/joal/article/view/1 [65] Hu, Y., Janowicz, K., McKenzie, G., Sengupta, K., & 1 Hitzler, P. (2013). A Linked-Data-Driven and [52] Governatori, G., Hoffmann, J., Sadiq, S., & Weber, I. Semantically-Enabled Journal Portal for (2008). Detecting regulatory compliance for business Scientometrics. In Alani, H., Kagal, L., Fokoue, A., process models through semantic annotations. In Groth, P., Biemann, C., Parreira, J. X., … Janowicz, K. Business Process Management Workshops, Lecture (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Semantic Notes in Business Information Processing 17: 5–17. Web Conference (ISWC 2013), Lecture Notes in Berlin, Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642- Computer Science 8219: 114–129. Berlin, Germany: 00328-8_2 Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-41338-4_8 [53] Governatori G., Rotolo A., Villata S., & Gandon F. [66] Iannella, R. (2015). ODRL Version 2.1 Core Model (2013). One License to Compose Them All: a Deontic Final Specification: 5 March, Logic Approach to Data Licensing on the Web of Data. https://www.w3.org/community/odrl/model/2.1/ In Proceedings of the 12th International Semantic Web [67] Kauppinen, T., Pouchard, L. C., & Keßler, C. (Eds.). Conference (ISWC 2013), Lecture Notes in Computerl (2011). Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop Sscience 8218: 151–166. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642- on Linked Science (LISC2011), CEUR Workshop 41335-3_10 Proceedings 783. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-783 [54] Grijzenhout, S., & Marx, M. (2013). The quality of the [68] Kauppinen, T., Pouchard, L. C., & Keßler, C. (Eds.). XML web. Web Semantics, 19: 59–68. DOI: (2012). Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop 10.1016/j.websem.2012.12.001 on Linked Science (LISC2012), CEUR Workshop [55] Gross-Brown, R., Ficek, M., Agundez, J. L., Dressler, Proceedings 951. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-951 P., & Laoutaris, N. (2014). Data Transparency Lab Kick Off Workshop (DTL 2014) Report. ACM [69] Keßler, C., d’ Aquin, M., & Dietze, S. (2013). Linked [80] Ossowski, S. (Ed.) (2013). Agreement Technologies. Data for science and education. Semantic Web, 4 (1): Law, Governance and Technology Series 8. Dordrecht, 1-2. DOI: 10.3233/SW-120091 The Netherlands: Springer. ISBN: 978-94-007-5582-6 [70] Knublauch, H., Horridge, M., Musen, M. A., Rector, A. [81] Pagallo, U. (2013). The Laws of Robots: Crimes, L., Stevens, R., Drummond, N., … Wang, H. (2005). Contracts, and Torts. Law, Governance and The Protégé OWL Experience. In Cuenca Grau, B., Technology Series 10. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Horrocks, I., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P. F. (Eds.), Springer. ISBN: 978-94-007-6563-4 st Proceedings of the 1 International Workshop on [82] Palmirani, M. (2012). Legislative XML: Principles and OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED 2005), technical tools. Rome, Italy: Aracne. ISBN: 978-88- CEUR Workshop Proceedings 188. http://ceur- 548-5625-7 ws.org/Vol-188/sub14.pdf [83] Palmirani, M. (2011). Legislative Change Management [71] Lodder, A.R., & Zeleznikow, J. (2010). Enhanced with Akoma-Ntoso. In Sartor, G., Palmirani, M., dispute resolution through the use of information Francesconi, E., Biasotti, M. A. (Eds.), Legislative technology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University XML for the Semantic Web, Law, Governance and Press. ISBN: 978-0-52151-542-9 Technology Series 4: 101–130. Dordrecht, The [72] Lohmann, S., Negru, S., Haag, F., & Ertl, T. (2014). Netherlands: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007- VOWL 2: User-Oriented Visualization of Ontologies. 1887-6_7 In Janowicz, K., Schlobach, S., Lambrix, P., Hyvönen, [84] Palmirani, M., & Ceci, M. (2010). FrameNet Model of E. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th International the Suspension of Norms. Informatica e diritto, 19 (1- Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge 2): 43–63. Management (EKAW 2014): 266–281. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-13704- [85] Palmirani, M., Cervone, L., & Bujor, O. (2013). Legal 9_21 Rules Modelling Meets the Web. In Proceedings of the First JURIX Doctoral Consortium and Poster Sessions, [73] Lu, L.Y.Y., & Liu, J.S. (2014). A survey of intellectual CEUR Workshop Proceedings 1105. http://ceur- property rights literature from 1971 to 2012: The main ws.org/Vol-1105/poster4.pdf path analysis. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Management of Engineering & [86] Palmirani, M., Contissa, G., & Rubino, R. (2009). Fill Technology (PICMET 2014): 1274–1280. Hoboken, the Gap in the Legal Knowledge Modelling. In New Jersey, US: IEEE. Governatori, G., Hall, J., Paschke, A. (Eds.), Rule Interchange and Applications, Lecture Notes in [74] Luz, N., Poblet, M., Silva, N., & Novais, P. (2015). Computer Science 5858: 305–315. Berlin, Germany: Defining Human-Machine Micro-Task Workflows for Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-04985-9_28 Constitution Making. Outlooks and Insights on Group Decision and Negotiation, Lecture Notes in Business [87] Palmirani, M., & Vitali, F. (2011). Akoma-Ntoso for Information Processing 218: 333–344. Cham, Legal Documents. Sartor, G., Palmirani, M., Switzerland: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-19515- Francesconi, E., Biasotti, M. A. (Eds.), Legislative 5_26 XML for the Semantic Web, Law, Governance and Technology Series 4: 75–10. Dordrecht, The [75] Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P. F., & Parsia, B. (2012). Netherlands: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007- OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Structural 1887-6_6 Specification and Functional-Style Syntax (Second Edition). W3C Recommendation 11 December 2012. [88] Patkos, T., Flouris, G., Papadakos, P., Bikakis, A., Casanovas, P., González-Conejero, J., Figueroa, R. V., World Wide Web Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/ Hunter, A., Idir, G., Ioannidis, G., Kacprzyk-Murawsk, M., … Stan, A. (2015). Privacy-by-Norms Privacy [76] Motik, B., Shearer, R., & Horrocks, I. (2009). Expectations in Online Interactions. In Proceedings of Hypertableau Reasoning for Description Logics. Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 36: 165– (SASOW 2015): 1–6. Hoboken, New Jersey, US: 228. DOI: 10.1613/jair.2811 IEEE. DOI: 10.1109/SASOW.2015.5 [77] Muñoz-Soro, J. F., Esteban, G., Corcho, O., & Serón, [89] Peroni, S. (2014). Semantic Web Technologies and F. (2016). PPROC, an Ontology for Transparency in Legal Scholarly Publishing. Law, Governance and Public Procurement. Semantic Web, 7 (3). DOI: Technology Series 15. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. 10.3233/SW-150195 ISBN: 978-3-319-04776-8 [78] Oliveira Lima, J. A., Palmirani, M., & Vitali, F. (2008). [90] Peroni, S., Gray, T., Dutton, A., & Shotton, D. (2015). A Time-aware Ontology for Legal Resources. In Setting our bibliographic references free: towards open Arsenault, C., & Tennis, J. T. (Eds.), Culture and citation data. Journal of Documentation, 71(2): 253– identity in knowledge organization: Proceedings of the 277. DOI: 10.1108/JD-12-2013-0166 10th International Conference on International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO 2008): 63–69. [91] Peroni, S., Shotton, D., & Vitali, F. (2012). The Live Würzburg, Germany: Ergon. OWL Documentation Environment: a tool for the automatic generation of ontology documentation. In ten [79] Oliveira Lima, J. A., Palmirani, M., & Vitali, F. (2008). Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, Moving in the time: An Ontology for Identifying Legal H., d'Aquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Resources. In Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Casellas, N., Hernandez, N. (Eds.), Knowledge Engineering and Rubino, R. (Eds.), Computable Models of the Law: Knowledge Management - Proceedings of the 18th Languages, Dialogues, Games, Ontologies, Lecture International Conference on Knowledge Engineering Notes in Computer Science 4884: 71–85. Heidelberg, and Knowledge Management (EKAW 2012), Lecture Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-85569- Notes in Computer Science 7603: 398–412. Berlin, 9_5 Germany: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33876- MPEG-21 Media Contract Ontology. Semantic Web, 7 2_35 (3). DOI: 10.3233/SW-160215 [92] Peroni, S., Shotton, D., & Vitali, F. (2013). Tools for [105] Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Gómez-Pérez, A., & the automatic generation of ontology documentation: a Mihindukulasooriya, N. (2012). Rights declaration in task-based evaluation. International Journal on linked data. In Hartig, O., Sequeda, J., Hogan, A., Semantic Web and Information Systems, 9 (1): 21–44. Matsutsuka, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth DOI: 10.4018/jswis.2013010102 International Workshop on Consuming Linked Data [93] Peruginelli, G., & Ragona, M. (Eds.) (2009). (COLD2013), CEUR Workshop Proceedings 1034. Proceedings of the IX International Conference Law http://ceur-ws.org/Vol- via the Internet. Florence, Italy: European Publishing 1034/RodriguezDoncelEtAl_COLD2013.pdf Academic Press. [106] Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Suárez-Figueroa, M. C., [94] Peters, W., Sagri, M. T., & Tiscornia. D. (2007). The Gómez-Pérez, A., & Poveda-Villalón, M. (2013). structuring of legal knowledge in LOIS. Artificial License Linked Data Resources Pattern. In Proceedings Intelligence and Law, 15 (2): 117–135. DOI: of the 4th Workshop on Ontology and Semantic Web 10.1007/s10506-007-9034-4 Patterns (WOP 2013). CEUR Workshop Proceedings 1188. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1188/paper_7.pdf [95] Pettifer, S., McDermott, P., Marsh, J., Thorne, D., Villeger, A., & Attwood, T. K. (2011). Ceci n’est pas [107] Sartor, G., Casanovas, P., Casellas, N. & Rubino, R., un hamburger: modelling and representing the (2008). Computable Models of the Law and ICT: State scholarly article. Learned Publishing, 24 (3): 207–220. of the Art and Trends in European Research. In DOI: 10.1087/20110309. Casanovas, P., Sartor, G., Casellas, N., Rubino, R. (Eds.), Computable Models of the Law: Languages, [96] Poblet, M. (2013). Visualizing the law: crisis mapping Dialogue, Games, Ontologies, Lecture Notes in as an open tool for legal practice. Journal of Computer Science 4884: 1–20. Berlin, Germany: Open Access to Law, 1 (1). Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-85569-9_1 https://ojs.law.cornell.edu/index.php/joal/article/view/1 2 [108] Shadbolt, N., O’Hara, K., Berners-Lee, T., Gibbins, N., Glaser, H., Hall, W., & Schraefel, M. C. (2012). Linked [97] Poblet, M., Noriega, P., Plaza, E. (Eds.) (2014) Open Government Data: Lessons from Data.gov.uk. Proceedings of the Sintelnet WG5 Workshop on Crowd IEEE Intelligent Systems, 27 (3): 16–24. DOI: Intelligence: Foundations, Methods, and Practices. 10.1109/MIS.2012.23 CEUR Workshops Proceedings 1148. http://ceur- ws.org/Vol-1148/ [109] Shotton, D. (2009). Semantic publishing: the coming revolution in scientific journal publishing. Learned [98] Poblet, M., Teodoro, E., Gonzalez-Conejero, J., Varela, Publishing, 22 (2): 85–94. DOI: 10.1087/2009202 R., Casanovas, P. (2016). A co-regulatory approach to stay safe online: reporting inappropriate content with [110] Shotton, D. (2013). Publishing: Open citations. Nature, the MediaKids mobile app. Journal of Family Studies. 502 (7471): 295–297. DOI: 10.1038/502295a DOI: 10.1080/13229400.2015.1106337 [111] Shotton, D., Portwin, K., Klyne, G., & Miles, A. [99] Poje, J. (2015). Virtual Law Practice. ABA Techreport (2009). Adventures in Semantic Publishing: Exemplar 2015. : Semantic Enhancements of a Research Article. PLoS http://www.americanbar.org/publications/techreport/20 Computational Biology, 5(4): e1000361. DOI: 15/VirtualLawPractice.html 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000361 [100] Polleres, A. (2013). Agreement Technologies and the [112] Sileno, G., Boer, A., & van Engers, T. (2014). Legal Semantic Web. In Ossowski, S. (Ed.), Agreement Knowledge Conveyed by Narratives: Towards a technologies, Law, Governance and Technology Series Representational Model. In OASIcs-OpenAccess Series 8: 57–67. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. DOI: in Informatics 41. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum 10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_4 fuer Informatik. [101] Presutti, V., Stankovic, M., Cambria, E., Cantador, I., [113] Sileno, G., Boer, A., & van Engers, T.M. (2014). On the Interactional Meaning of Fundamental Legal Di Iorio, A., Di Noia, T., Lange, C., Reforgiato th Recupero, D., & Tordai, A. (Eds.). (2014). Semantic Concepts. In Hoekstra, R. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 27 Web Evaluation Challenges 2014. Communications in International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Computer and Information Science 475. Cham, Information Systems (JURIX 2014), Frontiers in Switzerland: Springer. ISBN: 978-3-319-12023-2 Artificial Intelligence and Applications 271: 39–48. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press. DOI: [102] Prud’hommeaux, E., & Carothers, G. (2014). Turtle - 10.3233/978-1-61499-468-8-39 Terse RDF Triple Language. W3C Recommendation, 25 February 2014. World Wide Web Consortium. [114] Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B. C., Kalyanpur, A., & http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/ Katz, Y. (2007). Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Web Semantics, 5(2): 51–53. DOI: [103] Rodriguez-Doncel, V., Casanovas, P., Santos, C., 10.1016/j.websem.2007.03.004. Gómez-Pérez, A. (2015). A Linked Term Bank of Copyright-Related Terms. In Rotolo, A. (Ed.), [115] Steyskal, S., & Kirrane, S. (2015). If You Can’t Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Enforce It, Contract It: Enforceability in Policy-Driven Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX (Linked) Data Markets. In Filipowska, A., Verborgh, 2015), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and R., Polleres, A. (Eds.), Joint Proceedings of the Posters Applications 279: 91–100. Amsterdam, The and Demos Track of 11th International Conference on Netherlands: IOS Press. DOI: 10.3233/978-1-61499- Semantic Systems - SEMANTiCS 2015 and 1st 609-5-91 Workshop on Data Science: Methods, Technology and Applications (DSci15). CEUR Workshop Proceedings [104] Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Delgado, J., Llorente, S., 1481: 63-66. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1481/paper21.pdf Rodríguez, E., Boch, L. (2016). Overview of the [116] Suárez-Figueroa, M. C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Motta, E., & [122] van Kralingen, R.W. (1995). Frame-based conceptual Gangemi, A. (Eds.). (2012). Ontology engineering in a models of statute law. Computer/Law Series 16. networked world. Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer. ISBN: 978-9- Springer. ISBN: 9783642247934. 04110-128-0 [117] Sporny, M. (2013). HTML+RDFa 1.1: Support for [123] van Kralingen, R. W., Visser, P. R. S., Bench-Capon, RDFa in HTML4 and HTML5. W3C T. J. M., & van Den Herik, J. H. J. (1999). A principled Recommendation, 22 August 2013. World Wide Web approach to developing legal knowledge systems. Consortium. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-in-html/ International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51 [118] Valente, A. (1995). Legal Knowledge Engineering. (6): 1127–1154 . DOI: 10.1006/ijhc.1999.0300. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 30. [124] Vila-Suero, D., Rodríguez-Doncel, V., Gómez-Pérez, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press. ISBN: 978- A., Cimiano, P., McCrae, J. P. & Aguado de Cea, G. 90-5199-230-4 (2014). 3LD: towards high quality, industry-ready [119] Valente, A. & Breuker. J. (1994). A functional linguistic Linked Licensed Data. Presented during the ontology of law. In Bargellini, G., Binazzi, S. (Eds.), European Data Forum 2014. Towards a global expert system in law. Padua, Italy: http://delicias.dia.fi.upm.es/~vrodriguez/pdf/2014edf.p Cedam. df (last access March 2, 2016) [120] van Engers, T., Boer, A., Breuker, J., Valente, A. & [125] Vitali, F., & Zeni, F. (2007). Towards a country- Winkels, R.. (2008). Ontologies in the legal domain. In independent data format: the Akoma Ntoso experience. In Biagioli, C., Francesconi, E., Sartor, G. (Eds.), Chen, H., Brandt, L., Gregg, V., Traunmüller, R., th Dawes, S., Hovy, E., Macintosh, A., Larson, C. A. Proceedings of the 5 legislative XML workshop: 67- (Eds.), Digital Government, Integrated Series in 86. Florence, Italy: European Press Academic Information Systems 17: 233-261. New York, New Publishing. York, US: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-71611- [126] Zablith, F., Fernández, M., & Rowe, M. (2011). The 4_13 OU Linked Open Data: Production and Consumption. [121] van Engers, T.M., & van Doesburg, R. (2015). At Your In García-Castro, R., Fensel, D., Antoniou, G. (Eds.), Service. On the Definition of Services from Sources of Proceedings of ESWC 2011 Workshops - Revised Law. In Proceedings of the 15th International Selected Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law: 221- 7117: 35–49. Berlin, Germany: Springer. DOI: 225. New York, New York, US: ACM. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-25953-1_4. 10.1145/2746090.2746115